The real reason Boeing's new plane crashed twice

čas přidán
This isn’t just a computer bug. It’s a scandal.
Join the Video Lab! bit.ly/video-lab
Two Boeing airplanes have fallen out of the air and crashed in the past six months. On the surface, this is a technical failure. But the real story is about a company's desire to beat their rival.
Read about Boeing's efforts to get the 737 Max reinstated for flight here: www.vox.com/2019/4/5/18296646/boeing-737-max-mcas-software-update
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out www.vox.com.
Watch our full video catalog: goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Facebook: goo.gl/U2g06o
Or Twitter: goo.gl/XFrZ5H

Komentáře

  • Flying safe btw, idiots.

  • Very disappointing Boeing. Time to design a new jet. And this time around, grab your balls and tell fossil fuel industries where they can stick it when you include new technologies that heretofore have been sequestered or forbidden.

  • Boeing screws up royally, killing people, so naturally it's time to cue the brain dead Vox viewers to crawl out of the woodwork and pin the blame on "the evils of capitalism." What you fail to recognize is that it is free-market capitalism which guarantees that Boeing will pay for its negligence THROUGH THE NOSE by losing multi-billions in sales to Aerobus. FOOLS! But the really-and-truly hilarious thing about you AOC voters is that you think that, if we can just do away with capitalism, THEN PLANES WILL NO LONGER CRASH!

  • I already HATE flying. Now I'm really freaked out about it. Ughhhh...

  • Mass murder lock up all those involved in hiding this.

  • I'm from Indonesia, we don't know what to do, Boeing Ignorant! 🤕🤕🤕😔😔😔😔😔😔😔😔😔

  • it's all fixed now we can relax I want to see the United States of America sanction those countries that have cancelled orders...

  • Like downloading more RAM....

  • Just be weary of VOX, they are anti American.

  • The fundamental problem is that because of the design of the tailplane there is insufficient control authority to push the nose down against the pitch up moment of the more powerful engines. A tailplane redesign would require a full certification of effectively a new type which would have taken much longer and cost more, leaving the market for Airbus to dominate. So a new system, MCAS, is introduced that has more authority than the controls alone. But this system relies on the signal from a single sensor. There are two of these sensors, it would be possible to arrange that both sensors had to show a problem before the MCAS operates. But then it might not operate when it should. A third sensor could solve this, MCAS only operating when at least two show a problem. More complicated, more time needed to develop and certify it. The bottom line is that Boeing knowingly cut corners in the rush to get to market. They ignored warnings from experienced pilots flying the aircraft. That killed hundreds of people. It is costing airlines that trusted Boeing's promises about the aircraft a fortune. Boeing's solution? A software fix. That won't fix the tailplane.

    • I don't think you know as much as you pretend to know. Try reading something by someone who actually does know what he's talking about, and maybe in the future you won't make a fool out of yourself in public again. www.satcom.guru/2019/04/stabilizer-trim-loads-and-range.html

  • They should do a movie about the cover up and the criminal actions of Boeing who led to this tragedies.

  • Bring back the dam 757 hotrod 🚀 ✈️ 🚀

  • Problem with capitalism, part 12, 957

  • Frankenplane

  • Boeing = we care about “ our profits more then your safety “ period!!!

  • MONEY is what makes us expendable to the corporations, lawyers and bankers. AIRBUS killed everyone until they figured out their damn computer was stalling the engines

  • There's a reason why this saying exists "if it's boeing I'm not going"

  • Sailors and soldiers of the US military know that you are following unlawful orders from your commander, it is not mutiny when you refuse to follow unlawful orders, you are doing the duty you swore an oath to. You are being led to your death not for the preservation of your country, but by a tyrant who has no respect for your life or the lives of others.

  • "Sully" Sullenberger weighed in on the Ethiopian crash. He said a pilot with only 200 hours should not be the captain. Not enough time.

  • These things often happen beczuse "managers" don't listen to engineers.

  • And they want to make self-driving cars now. I'm never going to trust my life to Microsoft.

  • M.C.A.S. 'May Crash And Slaughter' everyone on board.

  • Well said sir!!

  • w

  • The important thing is that everyone made great money and everyone had a great time. Thanks Obama !

  • Boeing and the Catholic Church will burn in hell. Sad.

  • capitalism at its finest

  • Boeing is a money hungry trash company, Airbus people are way more skilled.

  • I once had a trainee work on a software project with me. The software had to compute a particular percentage number. Obviously, that number could not be more than 100% But he was getting numbers higher than 100%! So, his fix was : if (percentage > 100.0) then percentage = 100.0 Neat! (except that the actual problem was still there, of course).

  • Now what do you Republibum Conservatards have to say now? Half senile Ronny Reagan: "Government IS the problem". So lets push aside the evil govt regulaters, let the companies self-regulate and we'll get free-market utopia, right? This goes on big-time with the pharma industry and its already had lethal results.

  • This video states that mounting the new engines higher on the 737 wing resulted in a greater tendency to pitch nose up, compared to older 737's with low mounted engines. Mounting the engines higher and closer the the center of mass should result in less nose up pitching tendency, unless the new engine is of vastly higher thrust. If it is true that this new 737 model has a higher tendency to pitch up when thrust is increased, there must be other factors in play like different weight and balance, center of lift position, angle of engine mount, etc. Simply mounting the engines higher should reduce (not increase) nose up tendency, all other things being equal.

  • Boeing released the 737 Max to fly on probability. Did they not learn about the stuck rudder. It would have been common sense to let the pilots to know how to manually trim the stabilizers. But then the question is that does 737 Max require the extensive training to learn to fly it without the MCAS.

  • ma come parla, lei salvinin non sembra un ministro ma un gangster, ste cazzo di macchine mi girano i coglioni , e aggiungici anche un porcozzio che prendi il voto del mio ortolano

  • In the news ,what is happening throughout the world natural disasters,disastrous war in Syria killing about half a million people since the conflict started the destruction and the terrible suffering of the Syrian children ,srilanka ,conflict with boko haram in Nigeria, disastrous war in Yemen,south Sudan,Afganistan,Pakistan,Libya,Heat wave in india killing thousands,uncommonly people dying throughout the world ,don’t you feel there is something unusual recently ,does that mean anything to you? In the Bible Jesus said ,when he is about to come, not only such things will happen but the next pulse of such things will be stronger. (matthew 24:6-8) He also said that finally there will be a crisis through out the world that has never been before and will Not be after(matthew 24:21) Imagine the evil things that have happened through out the world up to now,world war I & II ,what Hitler did to the Jews people(holocaust),atomic bomb dropped in heroshima and negasaki,famine in different parts of the world ,several natural disasters etc…,but non of these match what is about to come ,according to the bible. He is coming soon !he is at the door!!are you ready? He loves you and he wants to save you. The Bible says, "God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life" If you do not accept him, according to the bible, your destination will be hell, eternal suffering!! God reaches out in love to you and wants you to be His child. "As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe on His name." You can choose to ask Jesus Christ to forgive your sins and come in to your life as your Lord and Savior. If you want to accept Christ as your Savior and turn from your sins, you can ask Him to be your Savior and Lord by praying a prayer like this: "Lord Jesus, I believe you are the Son of God. Thank you for dying on the cross for my sins. Please forgive my sins and give me the gift of eternal life. I ask you in to my life and heart to be my Lord and Savior. I want to serve you always." Did you pray this prayer? IF YES please visit www.godlife.com/en/30-day-next-steps/introduction

  • wow what an eye opener, Boeing you basically lied, you put a band aid on a gaping wound , tried to pose as a top product but failed to just do it right, Lance Bakken could have made you new landing gear.

  • sorry guys we got bored

  • How people are stupid to dislike this video. They guy is showing whats wrong with the thing if you want to die shure jump on a Boeing 737

  • If its not boeing, i am not going (into the ocean)

  • V

  • If it's Boeing I'm not going

  • greed made it crash and it will crash again as long as money controls the fix.

  • I have to take an airplane every month and always check if I fly with an Airbus or Boeing; I’m systematically relieved when I see it’s an Airbus or Embraer

    • Other than the 737 MAX, all other Boeing aircraft are great. The dreamliner is one of my favourite but an Airbus fan and soon to be an A320 pilot.

  • I am a techie and, in generic, like all the perks that comes with. But we have the tendency to rely on it to much sometimes.... I think commercial aviation can benefit from a derivation of Isaac Asimov's '3 laws of robitcs' (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics), as long as humans are involved (either piloting or passenger): 1. A plane design should always be 'proper', meaning to be able to be piloted by 1 or more humans (in both the mechanical design as well as the electrical design) - so NO tinkering with the plane's natural balance like BOEING has done for instance 2. The pilot(s) should always be able to override ANY electronical aid the plane has, or turn it into 'failsave/basic mode'. 3. The pilot must have been trained and able to fly the plane with in failsave mode for motor-speed/power, roll, pitch and ailerons

  • Making profit while risking and gambling with people's lives.

  • What an appalling way to engineer a plane! First you find a structural problem with the placement of new larger engines, don't redesign the plane so the problem is solved, instead add on a complex and otherwise unnecessary computer program to forcibly try and overcome the the continuous flight problem caused by the failure to redesign the plane to suit the new engines, then don't tell anyone about it and don't retrain the pilots to be able to cope with the complex and unnecssary computer program that takes control of the plane. What could possibly go wrong??? This just goes against every tenant of engineering that I know of. You never try and solve a basic structural fault by tacking on some additional complexity. And what genious decided to give a computer program total control of a plane, so that even the pilot can't easily overide it? Have any of these morons ever seen the film 2001? Hal, the computer took control of the space craft, followed its basic directive, and murdered all the crew except one in the carrying out of its directive. Wake up world! Computers are not the infallible answer to all life's problems.

  • Damn I was just about to invest in Boeing stock 😅

  • That how it is with the airplane manufacturers, they make cynical economic calculations: This many crashes, this many casualties, this amount of money paid in compensations compared to installing expensive systems in their planes to prevent the crashes. And why? You see it yourself in the video: There is almost no competition with only two big companies dominating the market, they are so rich that they cannot go bankrupt even with thousands of casualties. This is why both Boeing and Airbus should have any type of plane grounded for a year after a crash. Here you have two crashes within a short period of time - so let them fix the problem, and THEN ground the planes for another two years. That will stop them making stupid, cynical calculations costing their customers their lives.

  • Whoever defends the criminals behind these deserved to be on board the crashed planes.

  • The New MCAS System And By That I Meant MCrASh System

  • I will not fly on this type of plane, ever! All the wallets and shoes remind me of the Holocaust museum...damned Boeing, you have blood on your hands.

  • Can someone explain to me why moving the engine up would cause the issue of the nose going up at full throttle? From my understanding, moving the center of thrust up should actually have the opposite effect?

    • You are correct. Boeing moved the engines forward on the 737 in the 80's when they made the 737-300. Even the 787 which is a new air frame has the engines mounted ahead of the wing. The MAX's engines being higher mounted, thus closer to the center line of the wing chord, likely produce less pitch up tendency than the Airbus NEO. 737's do not primarily rely on computer input for their flight controls. Airbus, being "fly by wire", uses computers to translate the pilot's commands into flight control movements. The computer won't let the pilot stall the plane in "normal law" mode. Airbus most certainly tweaked their software to counter the pitch up tendency the new larger engines create under high thrust. This tweaking of the flight software is effectively what MCAS was designed to do, just that Being did not possess such software on the 737 previously. There is nothing wrong with the MAX design. The problem is with the programming of the MCAS system.

  • Vox = Fake

  • What's the hack? How many of them thar' plains have been built and in operation? 2 crashes only?

  • MCAS - May Crash Airplane Suddenly

    • Bet it took you a couple of days to come up with that zinger.

  • There should be people in jail already... But, uh, oh, is Boeing. There is a place that like to point fingers but when it comes to these kind of scandals, oopsy.

  • LAW SUIT !!!!

  • The 737 max is an inherently unstable design with its large engines hinging so much out and upward. Boeing literally redefined the flying rules for a stable aircraft since the first 737 plane from the 1960’s. Malfunctioning sensors exacerbated the issue further. Boeing must pay for all the deaths of innocent souls. The A320 Neo with its new bigger fan blade engines didn’t end up altering how the air flow moves around the aircraft, unlike this Max crap. Boeing’s reported 2 sensor theory for a better MCAS is bound to fail again for the aforementioned reason. Do not fly this plane if you wish to live. Even turning off the MCAS entirely isn’t enough to keep this max plane naturally stable because of its inherently flawed design.

  • Americans can only think about money. Don't like America. I am glad to live in the UK.

  • So your telling me, ->The Ethiopian crash took place on the *10th of March 2019*. ->The complaint about MCAS took place on the *12 of March 2019*. ->The comment about how pilots needing no additional training (and the iPad thingy) took place on the *17th of March 2019*. ->The statement that every 737-MAX would be grounded took place on the *13 of March 2019*. ->And that the Lion Air crash took place in *October 2018*, (and you said they were operating the 737-MAX. Yet you said... Boeing only came up with the idea to move the engine on the plane up on the *20th of March 2019*, leading it to be pointless for Boeing to have called their normal 737, the 737-MAX without the new addition, and that Boeing wouldn't have made MCAS without the idea of the 737-MAX, meaning those crashes wouldn't have been caused... So what's going on?

  • Heads need to roll at the highest level, The top management! What I get from this Video is why didn't they put a bigger undercarriage in to bring it up higher? Good Video, first I have seen that explains the fundlementals.

    • Their is no room in the airframe for longer gear. The entire plane would have to be redesigned. Boeing moved the engines forward on the 737 in the 80's when they made the 737-300. Even the 787 which is a new air frame has the engines mounted ahead of the wing. The MAX's engines being higher mounted, thus closer to the center line of the wing chord, likely produce less pitch up tendency than the Airbus NEO. 737's do not primarily rely on computer input for their flight controls. Airbus, being "fly by wire", uses computers to translate the pilot's commands into flight control movements. The computer won't let the pilot stall the plane in "normal law" mode. Airbus most certainly tweaked their software to counter the pitch up tendency the new larger engines create under high thrust. This tweaking of the flight software is effectively what MCAS was designed to do, just that Being did not possess such software on the 737 previously. There is nothing wrong with the MAX design. The problem is with the programming of the MCAS system.

  • Quilt or innocence is dependent upon how much money you have. Ask O.J.

  • How sad is this? Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Boeing blame the error on the pilots in the beginning? Also, it was sad how the US was one of the last countries to finally ground this abomination of a plane.

  • I'll never fly on a Boeing airplane again (if I can help it.)

  • Software can't tackle fundamental problems. Even not being a prophet, I can predicate more Boeing airplane incidents are on the way.

  • Excellent video. Wonder why the concerned fake news outlets of ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, FOX didn't tell us this. Oh yeah, they had to make sure we all know how all women are better than white men, and how queers are the best thing to ever walk the planet and illegal alien invaders are the new Obama-type saviors that are going to make the U.S. great again.

    • Funny how everybody claims they don't trust the media...until it confirms their bias.

  • this is why capitalism is the problem

    • Your stupidity, knows no bounds!!! You must be residing in Venezuela..

  • American pilots know all about this and know what to do..................fear not. unless your from some backward country

    • +Fazal M Clearly you don't know what "inherent stability" means.

    • earpaper Why is the max grounded in this forward country you speak of having forward pilots? Even turning off the MCAS entirely isn’t going to help, because the Max is an inherently unstable design versus the naturally stable 737 or A320 or any other plane without a quick fix solution to fix a 1960 vintage to keep it flying in 2018 onwards. The current crop of Americans at Boeing are no better than Chinese copy cat artists. Atleast China fixes things better after a few incidents. This max aircraft is totally doomed and only the 737 NG or Classic safe to fly.

  • So they will make MCAS less aggressive...so what now , it will stall on take off? Its a bad design, they should have raised the plane higher off the ground and spent a little more money... Engineer and CEO down should be fired.

  • Glad this happened with boeing...airbus is anyday better! sad for the lives lost but Boineg needs to die now!

  • I would have no problem flying in the aircraft as it is now configured. The video is misleading. The MCAS was intended as an extra safety feature that would minimize stall risks. It was obviously defective and the failure to inform people being trained on the aircraft about *any* system that could impact an aircraft’s reaction to pilot input was a major failure. That being said *all* twin jet aircraft nose up in high thrust flight and there is nothing unique about the 737MAX in that regard. The engines being higher relative to the leading edge of the wing wouldn’t impact that phenomenon. Rather, the engines are more powerful and hence the aircraft can get into a higher angle of attack faster than a plane with less thrust. This did not necessitate the MCAS. It was an “extra” that turned out to be a catastrophe. Boeing will pay dearly for that. But the aircraft itself is not defective.

  • They didn’t talk to pilots. The MCAS is obviously dangerous and training was required but wasn’t provided. But *all* twin jet aircraft pitch nose up during high thrust flight and the aircraft design isn’t unstable or dangerous.

    • All planes with wing mounted engines tend to pitch up during high thrust.

  • There are some facts here ... and also a lot of speculation. This stuff may sound reasonable, but there's little to substantiate it. Nor any citations. Thinkers beware.

    • Agree. I love the ones that say "It pitches up because the engines are too heavy and too far forward"..........like what?

  • this is an attack piece against boeing and industry in general there is no objective viewpoint , boeing did try to correct the problem which had unforeseen problem they then grounded their own planes until a better solution could be used

  • Where is the accountability ? The FAA and Boeing should be dragged before criminal and civil courts.....and if that means fines that result in Boeing going bust..so be it ! The FAA are incompetent at best and complicit at worst (my money is on the latter).. as they wanted the US company to be able to compete against a European company and threat to America jobs.....Trump'ism at its best !!!!.....the FAA should protect the people not big business...in my book they are more culpable then the greedy Boeing exec's !....shame on all involved and god bless the victims

    • It won't happen, because only black and brown people mostly died! Their lives are exependable...

  • Money for lives. Really cruel

  • Money > humans

  • Like with the Challenger disaster it will take some time (centuries possibly) for us humans to finally pay attention to Mr. Feynman's warning: Mishandling high-tech infrastructure is bound to end up in disasters, very simply because nature and natural laws can't be tricked by gimmicks (may said gimmicks come from managers, CEOs or otherwise ...).

  • Now this is a Great Video!

  • EU should ground and ban all the newer Boeing models which were given green light by FAA

  • Im gonna fly to thailand in a few weeks, hope my flight doesn't crash D:

  • Where we droppin boys?

  • I take on average 70 flights a year and it’ll be a piggin’ long time before I get on one of those things even when they are signed off as safe. Someone is responsible for this and should be made accountable.....this was a known issue and they still flew! You can’t do ‘field development’ on an aircraft full of passengers!!!!

    • cs-tv.org/tv/video-ZtHBz2-YpWE.html

    • +stimproid 2 US pilots who know of the problem and the solution were put in a flight sim...and would have died as well: cs-tv.org/tv/video-ZtHBz2-YpWE.html

    • +charles harper There is nothing false in my statement. How did the thrust vector change? (careful how you answer this or you will confirm my statement above) You do realize that all planes with wing mounted engines, have a tendency to pitch up under heavy throttle right?

    • +stimproid You're being dishonest. They not only moved them forward, they moved them UP on the wing, changing the thrust vector. All because a 60 year old airframe lacked the necessary ground clearance...profit before safety.

    • +charles harper Boeing moved the engines forward on the 737 in the 80's when they made the 737-300. Even the 787 which is a new air frame has the engines mounted ahead of the wing. The MAX's engines being higher mounted, thus closer to the center line of the wing chord, likely produce less pitch up tendency than the Airbus NEO. 737's do not primarily rely on computer input for their flight controls. Airbus, being "fly by wire", uses computers to translate the pilot's commands into flight control movements. The computer won't let the pilot stall the plane in "normal law" mode. Airbus most certainly tweaked their software to counter the pitch up tendency the new larger engines create under high thrust. This tweaking of the flight software is effectively what MCAS was designed to do, just that Being did not possess such software on the 737 previously. There is nothing wrong with the MAX design. The problem is with the programming of the MCAS system.

  • Corporate murder.

  • Why do Boeing designs even need pilots if the plane won't let them fly the plane???????

  • Napa ga kaki"nya aja yg di tinggikan biar ga naik"in mesin gitu...

  • So the plane is not the same, and instead of telling pilots about it they installed a system that pilots didn't even know about. Sounds like criminal negligence to me.

    • And the NY Times report that the Max simulators didn't even have MCAS programmed into the simulations. So there was no way pilots could have learned how to deal with it...

  • I came back to watch this again because just a few days ago a portion of a leading edge flap from a Boeing 747 washed ashore of the island I live on.

  • Boieng is going to have to pay billions in total compensation to all the deceased peoples families because it can be proved that they knew they were going to die for several minutes before both crashes.

  • That engineer is going to kill himself

  • well this makes me not want to ever get on a plane again

    • You are far more likely to get struck by lightening, than die in a plane crash. 40,000 people die in car accident every year in the US alone. Flying is exceptionally safe.

  • MCAS, a software cannot be overrided by pilots and has no malfunction protection mechanisms. This kind of design has been proved to be lethal almost 60 years ago. Somehow, the FAA managed to ignore this obvious deficit and gave Boeing the airworthiness certificate. And continue to denying the problem and refused to ground the fleet after the two devastating accidents until Trump gave the order. What a joke. Well done FAA you murderers.

  • ​Update : According various sources and the official preliminary report all airlines worldwide and every single 737 MAX pilot received, after the first crash, a "bulletin" (nov 6th, 2018) how to cope with this (MCAS, stabilizer) problem, including the 29 year old, inexperienced captain of the crashed Ethiopian Air 737-8 MAX. We all have a copy of the preliminary report with the address of "Ethiopian Airlines" on it. He apparently did not follow the Boeing procedure correctly. Period. After first correctly turning off the hydraulic trim, he elected to switch ON the "stab trim cutout switches", again. That was the final nail in the coffin, after he forgot to reduce thrust (he never touched the thrust levers after liftoff... they were left at about 92% N1). Logically the aircraft accellerated to a extremely high speed, way too high for the electric and manual trim. And then they crashed with high speed (between 460 and 500 knots). His copilot had a mere 361 hours total (including Cessna 150...!), and 207 hours on the 737 passenger aircraft. He was of no help, at all. I don't blame him. I blame Ethiopian Air. The captain spent 6705 hours of his total time of 8122 hours in the copilots seat on longhaul trips, mostly operating the radios, getting a landing once in a while. According this (official) number he had way fewer than one thousand landings... He had only exactly 1417 hours as a captain and on 737, including training. He was a rookie as a captain and a posterboy for his company. The procedures on stabilizer problems are very clear. The captain was inexperienced and overwhelmed with a manageble problem, in daylight and VMC. Other 737-MAX pilots had no problems and saved the day and hundreds of lives. That's what passengers expect from us. Blame Ethiopian Air for scheduling a pedestrian pilot with a rookie captain. Was the MCAS a problem? Yes, partly. But most of the time the problem is sitting in the cockpit, not following procedures correctly. .

    • Absolute bloody rubbish. In fact the NY Times is reporting the Max simulators didn't even have MCAS programmed into it, and couldn't simulate this problem. Further, US pilots have said that they WERE NOT informed of it: www.youtube.com/watch?v= cs-tv.org/tv/video-CshWIpB-8Mw_.html4xBXXng

  • Fly in an airbus instead

  • Everything must be subservient to corporate profits. Even humans lives. That is the world view that dominates our government.

  • this is not the reason why these accidents keep happening. its because pilots who have not flown these types of planes before are briefed way to quickly and thus make mistakes. Its often foreign pilots who fly american planes such as Boeing and the airlines give them little training on how to use them.

  • Too much propaganda in this. All the pilot had to do was turn the thing off that was malfunctioning and everything would have been fine. But the pilot screwed up. Before you go jump and do conclusions, wait for more information. This isn't the one side argument or failure.

  • Old design forget it and replace by a 757 max

  • Boeing needs to be punished for this just like the Roundup company had to pay $2 billion to a couple based off of dubious evidence it caused cancer. We know Boeing killed people. There is real evidence they have blood on their hands. They should have to pay $20 billion to all the people who died in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. DONALD TRUMP!!! YOU MUST ACT NOW AND FORCE BOEING TO PAY REPARATIONS!!!!! YOU SHOULD ALSO NATIONALIZE BOEING SO THEY WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO COMMIT SUCH ATROCITIES AGAIN!!!!!!

  • Why allow a software that will "fight" the pilots for control? Maybe a reminder to the pilots to keep the nose a little lower on take off with the Max 8. They are capable of that, they're pilots, not booger eaters. Let them fly the plane.

    • The reason the computer fought with them is due to a faulty AOA sensor. This was a single point failure....Boeing only put in one AOA sensor for the MCAS. The computer was getting erroneous data from the faulty sensor with no other data to compare it to.

  • I fly almost daily on United Airlines and never feared an airplane. Still this confirms my suspicions...that plane is basically unbalanced and they are using software to correct a plane that just is not stable. I never will board another MAX. Boeing has built a fundamentally flawed machine in my opinion.

    • When does "unbelievably dumb" segue into "criminally liable"? The entire 737 fleet was designed around a lowered profile so that baggage handlers would not need to ride a lift to open the baggage hatches. That's the principal reason the engines are so close to the ground (17 inches). A truly stupid, fifty year old design decision. Maybe if Boeing had just lengthened the main landing gear a couple of feet to accommodate larger engines hundreds of passengers would not have been killed. No need for MCAS. Who gives a damn about inconveniencing baggage handlers? Apparently, Boeing senior management values them over the lives of their passengers. www.thedailybeast.com/before-fatal-lion-air-crash-boeings-new-jet-hit-problem-in-tests